Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

For the first one, if it's short, you want to say why nationalism caused WW1. I can't answer the question for you, but that's how I'd answer it.

If it's an essay question, I'd go into why it was the main cause. There's an acronym for the causes of WW1. MAIN. Militarism, Alliances, Imperialism, & Nationalism. Go into each and why nationalism was the main cause as opposed to the others. If you have a choice in answering them, you probably don't want to do this one [or at least I wouldn't]

In the same manner, you take the rest of the questions and break them down. You figure out what they are asking and supply the answer, with a little analysis. These questions require some opinion, so you have a little freedom. Just back whatever you say with facts. I can't tell you what to write exactly. If you tell me your thought process, I can help you out some more.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

This question is extremely broad, like complete History Channel Series broad. As of now, it's not really clear what your essay will prove or what the alternative is (if nationalism is not the primary cause). I would recommend selecting a specific time frame and country to focus on. If you decide that you don't want to do Germany or another specific country, you can talk how the nationalist movements within countries X,Y, and Z interacted to cause WWI. I kind of feel like Nationalism is a very widely taught cause of WWI. I may be wrong, but you may want to focus on to something within that time frame that is more obscure, controversial, and original so you can write a focused, fact-filled essay and blow the grader away.

What role did leadership play in victory? (for WW1)

I think this is a bit iffy as well. I kind of feel that Leadership plays a key role in every victory. Aside from picking a specific country, time frame, and thinking of alternatives that can be more important than leadership, I think you may want to consider spinning your topic. IE: To what extent was Russia's Leadership under Tsar/Czar Nicolas II responsible for Russia's failure in WWI? This may be a more compelling aspect, but I'm a bit biased (mildly obsessed with 20th Century Russia). Anyway, consider it. It could be good. Especially if you account for the drastic changes that occurred as a result of Nicolas II's terrible leadership skills (Revolution).

How effective were Alex II reforrms?

I'm not going to lie. I had no idea what you were talking about here. I literally had to copy paste that into google. Granted, my specialty is 20th Century Russia, but that was still pretty bad that I didn't recognise it. After researching, I personally wasn't under the impression that Alexander II's reforms were that impressive. I feel like a lot of his reforms and his perspectives were responsible for the Revolution. The emancipation of the serfs left a lot of people in rather awkward positions. It didn't really change anything, it just caused more problems for the Alexander. While I understand these may be your primary talking points, I recommend specifically saying what you intend to talk about. I didn't know what Alex II's reforms were. "To what extent did the abolition of serfdom under Alexander II in 1862 accomplish its goals of X,Y, Z?"

Did Germany start WW1?

I think you need to get a lot more specific with this question. Was it German leadership or the German grasslands that started the war? Was it the Nationalist movement? Pick a time frame and examine the growth and development of one of the factors that made germany different from the other countries involved in the war.